ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Algorithm for predicting valvular heart disease from heart sounds in an unselected cohort.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Unimodal to multimodal: a systematic review of predictive machine learning models for valvular heart diseases.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Development and validation of AI-Enhanced auscultation for valvular heart disease screening through a multi-centre study.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Article
- Heart murmurs in the general population: diagnostic value and prevalence from the Tromsø Study.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2025Article
- Early heart disease prediction using LV-PSO and Fuzzy Inference Xception Convolution Neural Network on phonocardiogram signals.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2025Article
- Deep Learning in Heart Sound Analysis: From Techniques to Clinical Applications.Health data science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to assess the ability of state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms to detect valvular heart disease (VHD) from digital heart sound recordings in a general population that includes asymptomatic cases and intermediate stages of disease progression. Methods: We trained a recurrent neural network to predict murmurs from heart sound audio using annotated recordings collected with digital stethoscopes from four auscultation positions in 2,124 participants from the Tromsø7 study. The predicted murmurs were used to predict VHD as determined by echocardiography. Results: The presence of aortic stenosis (AS) was detected with a sensitivity of 90.9%, a specificity of 94.5%, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.979 (CI: 0.963-0.995). At least moderate AS was detected with an AUC of 0.993 (CI: 0.989-0.997). Moderate or greater aortic and mitral regurgitation (AR and MR) were predicted with AUC values of 0.634 (CI: 0.565-703) and 0.549 (CI: 0.506-0.593), respectively, which increased to 0.766 and 0.677 when clinical variables were added as predictors. The AUC for predicting symptomatic cases was higher for AR and MR, 0.756 and 0.711, respectively. Screening jointly for symptomatic regurgitation or presence of stenosis resulted in an AUC of 0.86, with 97.7% of AS cases ( Conclusions: The algorithm demonstrated excellent performance in detecting AS in a general cohort, surpassing observations from similar studies on selected cohorts. The detection of AR and MR based on HS audio was poor, but accuracy was considerably higher for symptomatic cases, and the inclusion of clinical variables improved the performance of the model significantly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.